Muscularity in males and self-perceived attractiveness in both sexes associate significantly negatively with egalitarianism

[Bangkok or bust]

Muscularity and attractiveness as predictors of human egalitarianism

In ancestral human environments, muscularity and height (in males) and physical attractiveness (in both sexes) would theoretically have correlated pos…

www.sciencedirect.com

They provide an interesting evo-psych explanation:

In ancestral human environments, muscularity and height (in males) and physical attractiveness (in both sexes) would theoretically have correlated positively with one’s social status, and thus with one’s ability to benefit from social inequality. We therefore hypothesized that individuals who are more characterized by these traits would be less egalitarian (i.e., less likely to believe that resources should be distributed equally in social groups).

Though I think it's rather a matter of rational decisions: Males with weak physical dominance traits may use morality, prosociality, smiling, and possibly affection or mimicry of infants etc. to avoid being regarded as creepy or anti-social. Their reputation is overall more vulnerable or on thin ice all the time compared to physically dominant males. If males cannot compete they also may instead be sneaky to females...

Edit: This pathway is possibly how some of the most persistent and loyal provider males are made, basically beta males driven towards a very high-investment strategy in order to get some physical affection, if at all.

 

[Gymcelled]

If you have what you need to be able to take things away from people of course you'd be against egalitarianism.

Chad doesn't think 1sec it's not ok for him to take all the girls.

 

[kingturtle]

I don't understand the paper. so good-looking people support less welfare, and ugly people support more welfare and money benefits? That sort of seems the case, just by looking around...

 

[Salustio]

35 dollars to purchase this article?

 

[Bangkok or bust]

I don't understand the paper. so good-looking people support less welfare, and ugly people support more welfare and money benefits? That sort of seems the case, just by looking around...

smaller built, less muscualr men support egalitarianism. Foids and muscle manly men do not.

 

[littlemanhikicel]

smaller built, less muscualr men support egalitarianism. Foids and muscle manly men do not.

So the jews support egalitarianism. But at the same time this society benefits more chads and all women...
So even in egalitarianism beta males loss, because only a few beta males find pussy but with an enormous effort.